Share this story

Before October 23 rolled around, there were rumors Apple might release a slightly revised iPad 3 around the same time as the iPad mini, likely adopting Apple's new Lightning connector. But the company actually had a bigger surprise in store, stuffing a faster A6X processor inside and calling it a "fourth-generation" iPad.

The move was uncharacteristic for Apple. By tradition, the company has never revved its mobile products more than once per year. The first three iPads were released about a year apart, all in the March/April timeframe. So why did Apple change up the iPad after just seven months?

We've heard a few theories, and have a few of our own. We thought it would be worthwhile to look at them and consider how much any lone reason may have influenced Apple.

Lightning compatibility

Adding compatibility with the new Lightning connector standard (as in, standard for Apple's mobile devices) was a no-brainer. Someone who owned an older iPad but recently bought a brand-new iPhone 5 suddenly found themselves swapping cables, or trying to carry multiple cables and chargers when traveling.

I solved this problem for my relatively technophobic girlfriend by buying a dual 10W charger, and hooking up one Dock connector cable and one Lightning connector cable.

But wouldn't it be nice if all your Apple devices used the same connector? Sure it would. That's the widely cited reason Apple was rumored to begin offering an updated iPad 3 around the launch of the iPad mini. After all, the holidays are around the corner, and iPads will show up in more than a few stockings.

How much did this weigh on Apple executives' thought processes when planning the iPad 4? We think it's plausible Apple could have offered this as the only change and gotten a few buyers. But the assembly line would have to be modified to make new aluminum shells and attach the new connector. And think of the headache of trying to handle the customer confusion when someone thought they were getting a 30-pin Dock-compatible device and got the Lightning-compatible one instead. We suspect Apple wanted a more substantial update too if it was time to handle a simple connector swap.

Performance improvement

Since the iPad 3 offered seemingly identical performance to the lower-resolution iPad 2, the lack of any tangible performance improvement was often seen as a sore spot for the otherwise nice generational upgrade of the iPad 3.

The A6X processor in the iPad 4 is significantly faster than the A5X in the iPad 3, offering double the number-crunching and graphics performance. Since a speed boost is what many iPad buyers claimed to have missed with the iPad 3, we suspect improving performance sooner rather than later might have been high on Apple's reasons to update.

Besides, Apple already did the heavy lifting in designing the A6X's ARMv7s-based "Swift" core for the iPhone 5's A6. Adding another 32nm processor variant to Samsung's chip fabs was probably no big deal.

LTE compatibility

LTE has sort of been its own "bag of hurt" for Apple. As LTE compatibility began becoming standard on most high-profile Android handsets over the last two years, Apple's devices chugged along on 3G speeds. Apple repeatedly noted the high power drain from existing LTE chipsets made including compatibility a "design compromise" Apple wasn't willing to make.

However, baseband chip supplier Qualcomm was expected to release a newer generation LTE chipset that integrated support for LTE, EV-DO, and HSPA+ standards on a power-efficient 28nm process early this year. Unfortunately, sufficient volume of these chips weren't available when Apple began assembling the iPad 3 for launch in March. Apple had to release the "iPad Wi-Fi + 4G" with an older LTE chip design that was only compatible with LTE networks in the US and Canada.

The extra power drain wasn't much of a concern for the iPad 3, which already had a gargantuan battery to power its Retina display. But the limited compatibility with international LTE networks ended up triggering a couple million dollars in fines.

It seems likely that updating the LTE chip to the newer Qualcomm design (which is compatible with most LTE networks around the world) factored heavily into Apple's decision to release an updated iPad a head of its usual schedule. After all, over 60 percent of Apple's revenues now come from customers outside the US. It can't risk alienating users with "US-only" features when a technical solution is available.

Surface/Nexus 10 competition

Maybe Apple felt increased competition in the tablet market, in particular from Microsoft's Surface, Google's Nexus 7, and more recently, Google's Nexus 10. It seems plausible that the increased offerings could have worried Apple a bit. After all, if it stuck to its usual March/April launch cycle, it would be six months before Apple could wow potential buyers with something that might sway them away from the competition.

By releasing an updated iPad with the fast A6X processor, Apple has made more of a moving target for its competitors to deal with hitting.

We do think Apple definitely considered competitive strategy on its list, but we suspect this reasoning was more toward the bottom than the top.

iPad sales were slowing

iPad sales have historically (and no doubt, less than three full years of availability is a short history) risen throughout the year. They usually peak in Apple's fiscal first quarter, which happens to coincide with the holiday shopping season. Sales then drop in fiscal second quarter as potential iPad buyers await an announcement from Apple about the new version. However, Apple posted strong iPad sales after the initial launch of the iPad 3, which then dropped noticeably the following quarter (ending in September).

Even if Apple had been tracking the declining sales sooner and decided to react swiftly, that would only have given its engineers a couple months to get a new device out the door. A more plausible explanation is Apple was already working on a few of these elements for a revised iPad, and decided to release what was ready right now.

Still, despite the unexpected quarter-over-quarter drop, iPad sales were still up 26 percent year-over-year. Apple sold 14 million iPads altogether in fiscal fourth quarter. We suspect Apple wasn't as concerned about a potential blip in sales figures, though. Or at least, not worried enough to quickly develop a new model out of panic.

Holiday shopping timing

Perhaps the most interesting theory I heard was the impact of a fall iPad release on the holiday shopping season. As we noted above, iPad sales peaked at the end of the year when people bought them as gifts. The same has always been true for the iPod, and perhaps the iPhone, too.

As the theory goes, March was a bad time of year to release new iPad models. Someone's amazing new Christmas present would look old and busted just a few scant months after the holidays. But if Apple moved the iPad release cycle to fall, around the same time as new iPhones and iPods, it puts all of Apple's mobile devices "under the same seasonal umbrella." In other words, "it ensures that Apple has a host of new devices ready in time for the critical holiday demand," according to CNET's Lance Whitney.

We think there's really something to this thinking. Would you be more likely to buy someone an iPad as a gift you were reasonably certain it wouldn't be superseded by an updated model for at least six to seven months? My guess is that's true for many buyers. And with the iPad mini launching with a more gift-able size and price, a simultaneous iPad update ensures the full-size device won't get lost in a mini frenzy.

The obvious downside is Apple's revenues could become highly dependent on a single quarter of sales. Though we have a feeling Apple isn't all that concerned with when it makes a boatload of money. The company only cares that it is maximizing its potential to consistently make a boatload every year.

All of the above

Given all these sensible explanations for Apple's acceleration of iPad development, it seems perfectly conceivable that Tim Cook and his team relied on some combination of all of them. Maybe there are more we aren't even privy to.

Pick any one of the reasons individually, and none likely justify an accelerated development and release cycle. But even just two or three of the cited reasons together is enough, we think, for Apple to forge ahead with a revised iPad—even if it might have rubbed some iPad 3 buyers the wrong way.

Tell us why you think Apple jumped the gun in the comments below.

Promoted Comments

Another option might be that Apple doesn't want to be tied to a yearly release schedule for a device now featuring heavy, dedicated competition. As it stands now, the iPad 4 appears to be a few steps ahead of the competition performance-wise. But, Google isn't playing around, and with smaller market share, isn't afraid to abandon current customers by pumping out new models every week.

That could potentially lead to an iPad 4 with "lower" raw performance as soon as early next year. That's a long time to fight the perception of lower specs.

If, on the other hand, Apple moved to a twice-yearly update cycle with a faster processor or more RAM or something, they would never be out of it.

* * *

I say this as someone that thinks the iPad 3 is about perfect and doesn't buy into the whole specs argument ... but I still understand they're powerful. This could just be Apple's way of blunting that particular criticism.